In-Distribution and Out-of-Distribution Self-Supervised ECG Representation Learning for Arrhythmia Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a systematic investigation into the effectiveness of Self-Supervised Learning (SSL) methods for Electrocardiogram (ECG) arrhythmia detection. We begin by conducting a novel analysis of the data distributions on three popular ECG-based arrhythmia datasets: PTB-XL, Chapman, and Ribeiro. To the best of our knowledge, our study is the first to quantitatively explore and characterize these distributions in the area. We then perform a comprehensive set of experiments using different augmentations and parameters to evaluate the effectiveness of various SSL methods, namely SimCRL, BYOL, and SwAV, for ECG representation learning, where we observe the best performance achieved by SwAV. Furthermore, our analysis shows that SSL methods achieve highly competitive results to those achieved by supervised state-of-the-art methods. To further assess the performance of these methods on both In-Distribution (ID) and Out-of-Distribution (OOD) ECG data, we conduct cross-dataset training and testing experiments. Our comprehensive experiments show almost identical results when comparing ID and OOD schemes, indicating that SSL techniques can learn highly effective representations that generalize well across different OOD datasets. This finding can have major implications for ECG-based arrhythmia detection. Lastly, to further analyze our results, we perform detailed per-disease studies on the performance of the SSL methods on the three datasets.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".